Flight delay and cancellation compensation, Ryanair ONLY

Justice13075

Congratulations. just as a matter of interest how many fare paying passengers were there?

ffiscool

It's interesting how inconsistent they are. I had emailed them after my 7 hour delay, plus lots other things that went wrong and they said they were passing my email to head office. Never heard again. Admittedly I didn't do the form. But I do think the way they work is on the whole rubbish. I am with a NWNF at the mo. They had until today to reply to the court or settle.

Well done on your result

I will never use them again however

PatMaguire

I am writing this as a postscript to my long running claim against Ryanair so that readers can see the whole story in one place (as opposed to having to trawl back through the forum – should they feel the need) and, more importantly, hopefully give encouragement to others in their dealings with Ryanair.

Back in October 2014 we visited M!laga, Spain for a short break booked at short notice and, hence, not the “low prices” that RA usually crow about. We were at the airport for our return flight departure at 4.45pm when it was announce there would be a delay. The Departure Board changed to 00.00pm and the plane that had been attached to the air bridge was moved away.

With hindsight it is now clear that RA made no attempt to find an alternative plane preferring to redirect the incoming flight from Leeds back to Leeds leaving us at the airport for 7½ hours. Support from RA was limited to offering us a refund by email and a €10 voucher for food after a struggle to any RA ground staff to meet us. Once on the plane it became clear that the air crew were originally rostered to finish their days work at M!laga (after 4 flights) and were “unhappy” about being asked to return to Leeds.

On our return I wrote to RA complaining about the delay and requesting compensation under EU Regulation 261/2004 which was rejected because RA claimed that the cause of the delay was “extraordinary circumstances”. Several other letters were sent asking for information – communications with RA were hindered by them replying to letters by email from email accounts that would not accept replies.

I briefly tried accessing help from a no win/no fee solicitors but was concerned that they (not unreasonably) reserved the right to control the claim but required us to carry the possible costs if it ever got to a court appeal stage. I've no problem with using a NW/NF solicitors but it wasn't for me.

Advice from forum – especially Dr Watson directed me towards the European Small Claims Procedure. It is possible to lodge any claim in any County Court in England but it helps if they have some idea what a ESCP claim is and, god forbid - if you actually have to go to court, it's helpful if it's within spitting distance. Sheffield was chosen as they had heard of the procedure and were very helpful. Cost for the claim was £70 and was delayed briefly as I made the mistake of putting the claim into Euros – UK courts struggle with that concept. We submitted a combined claim from both myself & wife – RA tried to claim couldn't do that (see later). Main claim was for €800 + interest + costs and relying on Huzar v Jet2. RA claimed that the delay was because of “exceptional circumstances” (ie the plane broke down) so they were “not liable”.

RA asked for a stay on case late Feb 2015 – because of Allen v Jet2 but, IMHO, as part of their delaying tactic on the hope that case brought before CJEU (Van de Lans v KLM) would reverse current case law. The stay was granted mainly, I think, because of the paperwork from Liverpool (Allen v Jet2) not arriving in Sheffield before the RA request – but I'll never know.

I submitted a request for the stay to be lifted and was offered the right to attend the court while that request was considered. Although not enthusiastic about attending the court I decided to attend if only to hear what that RA's fancy lawyers might say (after support & encouragement from Dr Watson). I need not have worried – RA's solicitors (Ince & Co) didn't bother to turn up and I was invited to have a semi informal chat with the judge in chambers. Result – stay lifted (immediately) and my request for a “hearing determined by papers alone” was granted.

Final papers on both sides presented for a hearing at Sheffield County Court “determined on the papers only”. RA's solicitors only additional line of defence was that we were not entitled to interest on any claim.

At the Hearing at Sheffield (22 May 2014) the judgement was that we should be paid the sum £668 to be “paid on or before 5 June 2014”. The Judges notes set out the case and the reasons for the outcome succinctly:

“1. I have considered all the papers in this file including the claim, the answer and
submissions of both parties at the hearing.

2. I reject the Defendant’s answer that it is not liable because the delay was caused b
“extraordinary circumstances” in the light of the decision in Huzar -v- Jet2.Com Ltd.

3. I reject the Defendant’s answer that it is not liable to pay half this claim because
Mr Maguire is not a normal Claimant. The substance of a joint claim has been clear
from the outset (see eg original statement of events dated 5 December 2014 signed by
both Mr and Mrs Maguire). If it is necessary for me to do so I give permission for
Mrs Maguire to be joined as a Claimant at this hearing and dispense with service of
any amended documents.

4. I give judgment to the Claimant(s) for 800 Euros as the principal due in respect of
their right to compensation for the delay. The equivalent in sterling today (rate of
1.40 Euros to the £) is £571.42 sterling.

5. I give judgment to the Claimant(s) for costs of £70.00 sterling for the
reimbursement of court fees.

6. I reject the Defendant’s answer that there is no power to award interest and/or that
a rate of 8% per annum (commonly awarded in the County Court) is disproportionate.
Accordingly I give judgment to the Claimants for 37.34 Euros (213 days from the
date this cause of action arose to judgment). The equivalent in sterling today (rate of
1.40 Euros to the fl) is £26.67 sterling.”

It has crossed my mind that both these judges might possibly have used RA and not had a happy experience. Importantly the judgement was attached to the all important Form D of the ESCP which can be actioned in any EU country (except surprisingly in Denmark).

In the naïve hope that RA would honour this judgement I waited until 5 June + 2 weeks for a cheque to arrive. When it didn't I contacted the Dublin County Sheriff by phone to ask about the procedure of actioning the Form D as a debt in the Irish Republic. Originals have to be sent (so good copies had to be made) with a fee of €9.50. This was initially a problem as I don't have access to a Euro cheque book but I finally used a money transfer company, Transferwise, which sent the €9.50 at the princely cost of £7,50 in total. It then took 3 months and several phone calls to the Sheriff's office in Dublin for the money from RA to arrive – a total of €917. This cost a further €20 to pay it into a Spanish bank. The delay at the Sheriff's office was explained as “cheques sometimes bounce so we leave them for a bit” but I suspect that it is more likely that this was a way of getting the interest for the Sheriff's office to supplement the very low fee for carrying out the work.

Reflecting back on this saga, although the process has been wearing at times the things that have kept me going (apart from my wife's opinion that I had “too much time on my hands” are:

1.The initial irritation of the off hand and dismissive “support” that RA gave at the airport and their subsequent attitude
2. The way they had treated the crew of the plane that brought us back
3. The fact that RA made almost €1bn profit last year
4. Even more was the fact that RA used to charge £4/€4 for every person that flew with them in case they claimed under the EU Regs for delays. This was then subsumed into the total price (as an EU requirement) but was continued so that RA made €87m profit last year from that additional payment that passengers pay and they still don't pay out!
5. Lastly – all the support from others on the Forum – especially from Dr Watson.

It does cross my mind that one of the reasons why RA appeared to respond minimally to my claim (other than ignoring me as much as possible that is) was that the easy and cost efficient way to block large numbers of claims is to concentrate on large “group” claims brought by legal firms in courts like Liverpool and/or Manchester whereas my claim in Sheffield was dealt with the least amount of involvement with Ince & Co. But I might well be wrong.

I hope that this encourages anyone that has flown with RA and been delayed or otherwise inconvenienced. Best wishes to all in their dealings with RA and any info/advice I can give please ask through a DM.

Dr_Watson

Excellent write up PatMaguire, good to hear that the process has delivered again.
You played your game particularly well whilst KLM v VDL was holding others up -you negotiated a path around this (at the time) annoying hurdle.
Of course now KLM v VDL is done and dusted there are many reports of litigants receiving contact from RA to settle their claims.
Well done again, for me it was a pleasure to be involved.

howticklediam

From today's Guardian:

“If I’d only learned in college that being nice was good for business I’d have done it years ago,” O’Leary told Bloomberg TV. “As long as it boosts profitability I don’t think there is any limit to my niceness.”

Funny guy!

Luten

phil24 wrote: »

i have made a claim against Ryanair using the ESCP issued by the uk courts, i have received a response from a solicitor acting on behalf of Ryanair stating that i cannot bring a claim using the ESCP in the english courts and it should be through the Irish courts as thats the defendants domicile and where the court with jurisdiction is. they also said the using the english courts on the basis that the its the claimants domicile doesn't apply to cases involving transport. do you have a view ????

Dr_Watson wrote: »

phil24,
Do I have a view?
Yep, that's complete twaddle from Mr Boden and Ince and Co and not the first time I have read/heard it either.
ESCP is the best and completely legitimate way to bring your claim against RA to the courts.
I'm presuming that the response you have received forms part of RA's 'answer' to your claim?

I have the same problem. Ryanair replied that my case is not under the jurisdiction of UK courts. Dr Watson, based on what regulations / laws / directives should I be able to use UK courts? The flight in question was a domestic flight in Spain.

Dr_Watson

Luten wrote: »

I have the same problem. Ryanair replied that my case is not under the jurisdiction of UK courts. Dr Watson, based on what regulations / laws / directives should I be able to use UK courts? The flight in question was a domestic flight in Spain.

Luten,
The reason you can use the UK court system and the ESCP is because (I'm presuming), that you are living here in the UK, and therefore any UK court can deal with your claim as they are within the domicile of you -the litigant. In other words they are a court within the country you live in, and can deal with your case as one of a cross border nature, using ESCP of course, against our friends RA over the water in Ireland.
Same response as before - I presume this statement forms part of RA's answer to you?
Good luck and keep going.

Luten

Dr Watson, I would also think that I should be able to use UK courts based on my location, but I can't find such a principle encoded in any laws… They argue I should sue them in Spain since the delay occurred there.

Dr_Watson

Luten wrote: »

Dr Watson, I would also think that I should be able to use UK courts based on my location, but I can't find such a principle encoded in any laws… They argue I should sue them in Spain since the delay occurred there.

Luten,
That's rubbish from RA.
See here:-

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=URISERV:l16028

You are an habitant of the UK, and RA are based in Ireland so your claim is one of a cross border nature that the ESCP is designed for.
There is nothing within this that says you can only bring a claim in the country that any such reason to bring the claim occurred. Nothing at all.
Ask RA to adduce evidence to support their claim that this is the case, and quote the evidence above as part of your answer.
Good luck and keep going.

ffiscool

I briefly tried accessing help from a no win/no fee solicitors but was concerned that they (not unreasonably) reserved the right to control the claim but required us to carry the possible costs if it ever got to a court appeal stage. I've no problem with using a NW/NF solicitors but it wasn't for me.'


I didn't know that, maybe I haven't read the small print :-(


Also, I couldn't do anything here via CAA as my delay was in Portugal and they ignored me when I wrote.